1 / 33

C&O 355 Lecture 19

C&O 355 Lecture 19. N. Harvey. TexPoint fonts used in EMF. Read the TexPoint manual before you delete this box .: A A A A A A A A A A. Topics. Solving Integer Programs Basic Combinatorial Optimization Problems Bipartite Matching, Minimum s-t Cut, Shortest Paths, Minimum Spanning Trees

yates
Download Presentation

C&O 355 Lecture 19

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. C&O 355Lecture 19 N. Harvey TexPoint fonts used in EMF. Read the TexPoint manual before you delete this box.: AAAAAAAAAA

  2. Topics • Solving Integer Programs • Basic Combinatorial Optimization Problems • Bipartite Matching, Minimum s-t Cut,Shortest Paths, Minimum Spanning Trees • Bipartite Matching • Combinatorial Analysis of Extreme Points • Total Unimodularity

  3. Mathematical Programs We’ve Seen • Linear Program (LP) • Convex Program • Semidefinite Program (SDP) • Integer Program (IP) (where f is convex) Can be efficiently solvede.g., by Ellipsoid Method (where X is symmetric matrixcorresponding to x ) Cannot be efficiently solvedassuming P  NP

  4. Computational Complexity NP coNP • If you could efficiently (i.e., in polynomial time) decide if every integer program is feasible, then P = NP • And all of modern cryptography is broken • And you win $1,000,000 • … Can graph be coloredwith · k colors? Does every coloringof graph use ¸ k colors? NPÅcoNP Is integer programfeasible? Is integer programinfeasible? P Sorting, string matching, breadth-first search, … Is LP feasible?

  5. Combinatorial IPs are often nice • Maximum Bipartite Matching(from Lecture 2) • Given bipartite graph G=(V, E) • Find a maximum size matching • A set Mµ E s.t. every vertex has at most one incident edge in M

  6. Combinatorial IPs are often nice • Maximum Bipartite Matching(from Lecture 2) • Given bipartite graph G=(V, E) • Find a maximum size matching • A set Mµ E s.t. every vertex has at most one incident edge in M The blue edges are a matching M

  7. Combinatorial IPs are often nice • Maximum Bipartite Matching(from Lecture 2) • Given bipartite graph G=(V, E) • Find a maximum size matching • A set Mµ E s.t. every vertex has at most one incident edge in M • The natural integer program • This IP can be efficiently solved, in many different ways

  8. Combinatorial IPs are often nice • Max-Weight Perfect Matching • Given bipartite graph G=(V, E). Every edge e has a weight we. • Find a maximum-weight perfect matching • A set Mµ E s.t. every vertex has exactly one incident edge in M 3 1 2 4 2 5 2 1

  9. Combinatorial IPs are often nice • Max-Weight Perfect Matching • Given bipartite graph G=(V, E). Every edge e has a weight we. • Find a maximum-weight perfect matching • A set Mµ E s.t. every vertex has exactly one incident edge in M 3 1 2 The blue edges are a max-weight perfect matching M 4 2 5 2 1

  10. Combinatorial IPs are often nice • Max-Weight Perfect Matching • Given bipartite graph G=(V, E). Every edge e has a weight we. • Find a maximum-weight perfect matching • A set Mµ E s.t. every vertex has exactly one incident edge in M • The natural integer program • This IP can be efficiently solved, in many different ways

  11. Combinatorial IPs are often nice • Minimum s-t Cut in a Graph(from Lecture 12) • Let G=(V,E) be a graph. Fix two vertices s,t2V. • An s-t cut is a set FµE such that, if you delete F, then s and t are disconnectedi.e., there is no s-t path in G\F = (V,E\F). t s

  12. Combinatorial IPs are often nice • Minimum s-t Cut in a Graph(from Lecture 12) • Let G=(V,E) be a graph. Fix two vertices s,t2V. • An s-t cut is a set FµE such that, if you delete F, then s and t are disconnectedi.e., there is no s-t path in G\F = (V,E\F). t s These edges are a minimum s-t cut

  13. Combinatorial IPs are often nice • Minimum s-t Cut in a Graph(from Lecture 12) • Let G=(V,E) be a graph. Fix two vertices s,t2V. • An s-t cut is a set FµE such that, if you delete F, then s and t are disconnected. • Want to find an s-t cut of minimum cardinality • Write a (very big!) integer program. Make variable xe for every e 2 E. Let P be set of all s-t paths. • This IP can be efficiently solved, in many different ways

  14. Combinatorial IPs are often nice • Shortest Paths in a Digraph • Let G=(V,A) be a directed graph. Every arc a has a “length” wa¸0. • Given two vertices s and t,find a path from s to t of minimum total length. 3 4 2 7 8 t 1 2 5 1 s 2 2 2 3 1 1

  15. Combinatorial IPs are often nice • Shortest Paths in a Digraph • Let G=(V,A) be a directed graph. Every arc a has a “length” wa¸0. • Given two vertices s and t,find a path from s to t of minimum total length. 3 4 2 7 8 t 1 2 5 1 s 2 2 2 3 1 1 These edges form a shortest s-t path

  16. Combinatorial IPs are often nice • Shortest Paths in a Digraph • Let G=(V,A) be a directed graph. Every arc a has a “length” wa¸0. • Given two vertices s and t,find a path from s to t of minimum total length. • There is a natural IP for this problem that can be efficiently solved, in many different ways.

  17. Combinatorial IPs are often nice • Minimum Spanning Tree in a Graph • Let G=(V,E) be a graph. Every edge e has a weight we. • An spanning treeis a set FµE with no cycles, such that F contains a path between every pair of vertices. 3 4 2 7 8 1 2 5 1 2 8 2 3 1 1

  18. Combinatorial IPs are often nice • Minimum Spanning Tree in a Graph • Let G=(V,E) be a graph. Every edge e has a weight we. • An spanning treeis a set FµE with no cycles, such that F contains a path between every pair of vertices. 3 4 2 7 8 t 1 2 5 1 s 2 8 2 3 1 1 These edges are a minimumspanning tree There is an s-t path in the tree

  19. Combinatorial IPs are often nice • Minimum Spanning Tree in a Graph • Let G=(V,E) be a graph. Every edge e has a weight we. • An spanning treeis a set FµE with no cycles, such that F contains a path between every pair of vertices. • There is a natural IP for this problem that can be efficiently solved, in many different ways.

  20. How to solve combinatorial IPs? • Two common approaches • Design combinatorial algorithm that directly solves IP • Often such algorithms have a nice LP interpretation • Relax IP to an LP; prove that they give same solution; solve LP by the ellipsoid method • Need to show special structure of the LP’s extreme points • Sometimes we can analyze the extreme points combinatorially • Sometimes we can use algebraic structure of the constraints.For example, if constraint matrix is Totally Unimodularthen IP and LP are equivalent • We’ll see examples of these approaches

  21. Perfect Matching Problem • Let G=(V, E) be a bipartite graph. Every edge e has a weight we. • Find a maximum-weight, perfect matching • A set MµE s.t. every vertex has exactly one incident edge in M • Write an integer program (IP) • Relax integrality constraints, obtain an LP (LP) (xe·1 is implicit) c • Theorem: Every BFS of (LP) is actually an (IP) solution!

  22. Combinatorial Analysis of BFSs • Lemma:Every BFS of perfect matching (LP) is an (IP) solution. • Proof: Let x be BFS, suppose x not integral. • Pick any edge e1={v0,v1} with 0 < xe1 < 1. • The LP requires) there is another edge e2={v1,v2} with 0 < xe2 < 1. • The LP requires) there is another edge e3={v2,v3} with 0 < xe3 < 1. • Continue finding distinct edges until eventually vi=vk,i<k • We have ei+1={vi,vi+1}, ei+2={vi+1,vi+2}, …, ek={vk-1,vk}.(all edges and vertices distinct, except vi=vk)

  23. Combinatorial Analysis of BFSs • Let x be BFS of matching (LP). Suppose x not integral. • WLOG, e1={v0,v1}, e2={v1,v2}, …, ek={vk-1,vk} and v0=vk. • These edges form a simple cycle, of even length. (Even length since G is bipartite.) • Define the vector: • Claim: If |²| is sufficiently small, then x+²d is feasible • So x is convex combination of x+²d and x-²d, both feasible • This contradicts x being a BFS. ¥

  24. How to solve combinatorial IPs? • Two common approaches • Design combinatorial algorithm that directly solves IP • Often such algorithms have a nice LP interpretation • Relax IP to an LP; prove that they give same solution; solve LP by the ellipsoid method • Need to show special structure of the LP’s extreme points • Sometimes we can analyze the extreme points combinatorially • Sometimes we can use algebraic structure of the constraints.For example, if constraint matrix is Totally Unimodularthen IP and LP are equivalent

  25. LP Approach for Bipartite Matching • Let G=(V, E) be a bipartite graph. Every edge e has a weight we. • Find a maximum weight matching • A set Mµ E s.t. every vertex has at most one incident edge in M • Write an integer program (IP) • Relax integrality constraints, obtain an LP (LP) (xe·1 is implicit) c • Theorem: Every BFS of (LP) is actually an (IP) solution!

  26. Total Unimodularity • Let A be a real mxn matrix • Definition: Suppose that every square submatrix of A has determinant in {0, +1, -1}. Then A is totally unimodular (TUM). • In particular, every entry of A must be in {0, +1, -1} • Lemma:Suppose A is TUM. Let b be any integer vector. Then every basic feasible solution of P = { x : Ax·b } is integral. • Proof: Let x be a basic feasible solution. Then the constraints that are tight at x have rank n. Let A’ be a submatrix of A and b’ a subvector of b corresponding to n linearly independent constraints that are tight at x. Then x is the unique solution to A’ x = b’, i.e., x = (A’)-1 b’. Cramer’s Rule: If M is a square, non-singular matrix then(M-1)i,j = (-1)i+jdetMdel(j,i) / det M. Submatrix of M obtained by deleting row j and column i

  27. Total Unimodularity • Let A be a real mxn matrix • Definition: Suppose that every square submatrix of A has determinant in {0, +1, -1}. Then A is totally unimodular (TUM). • Lemma:Suppose A is TUM. Let b be any integer vector. Then every basic feasible solution of P = { x : Ax·b } is integral. • Proof: Let x be a basic feasible solution. Then the constraints that are tight at x have rank n. Let A’ be the submatrix of A and b’ the subvector of b containing n linearly independent constraints that are tight at x. Then x is the unique solution to A’ x = b’, i.e., x = (A’)-1 b’. Cramer’s Rule: If M is a square, non-singular matrix then(M-1)i,j = (-1)i+jdetMdel(j,i) / det M. Thus all entries of (A’)-1 are in {0, +1, -1}. Since b’ is integral, x is also integral. ¥

  28. Operations Preserving Total Unimodularity • Let A be a real mxn matrix • Definition: Suppose that every square submatrix of A has determinant in {0, +1, -1}. Then A is totally unimodular (TUM). • Lemma:Suppose A is TUM. Let b be any integer vector. Then every basic feasible solution of P = { x : Ax·b } is integral. • Claim: Suppose A is TUM. Then is also TUM. • Proof: Exercise on Assignment 5. ¤ • Corollary: Suppose A is TUM. Let b be any integer vector. Then every basic feasible solution of P = { x : Ax·b, x¸0 } is integral. • Proof: By the Claim, is TUM. So apply the Lemma to . ¥

  29. Bipartite Matching & Total Unimodularity • Let G=(U[V, E) be a bipartite graph. • So all edges have one endpoint in U and the other in V. • Let A be the “incidence matrix” of G.A has a row for every vertex and a column for every edge. Note: Every column of A has exactly two non-zero entries. • Lemma: A is TUM. • Proof: Let Q be a kxksubmatrix of A. Argue by induction on k. If k=1 then Q is a single entry of A, so det(Q) is either 0 or 1. Suppose k>1. If some column of Q has no non-zero entries, then det(Q)=0. • 1 if vertex w is an endpoint of edge e • Aw,e = • 0 otherwise

  30. 1 if vertex v is an endpoint of edge e • Av,e = • Let G=(U[V, E) be a bipartite graph. Define A by • Lemma: A is TUM. • Proof: Let Q be a kxksubmatrix of A. Assume k>1. If some column of Q has no non-zero entries, then det(Q)=0. Suppose jth column of Q has exactly one non-zero entry, say Qt,j0 Use “Column Expansion” of determinant: , where t is the unique non-zero entry in column j. By induction, detQdel(t,j) in {0,+1,-1} )det Q in {0,+1,-1}. • 0 otherwise

  31. 1 if vertex v is an endpoint of edge e • Av,e = • Let G=(U[V, E) be a bipartite graph. Define A by • Lemma: A is TUM. • Proof: Let Q be a kxksubmatrix of A. Assume k>1. If some column of Q has no non-zero entries, then det(Q)=0. If jth column of Q has exactly one non-zero entry, use induction. Suppose every column of Q has exactly two non-zero entries. • For each column, one non-zero is in a U-row and the other is in a V-row. So summing all U-rows in Q gives the vector [1,1,…,1]. Also summing all V-rows in Q gives the vector [1,1,…,1]. So (sum of U-rows) – (sum of V-rows) = [0,0,…,0]. Thus Q is singular, and det Q = 0. ¥ • 0 otherwise

  32. 1 if vertex v is an endpoint of edge e • Av,e = • Let G=(U[V, E) be a bipartite graph. Define A by • Lemma: A is TUM. • So every BFS of P = { x : Ax·1, x¸0 } is integral. • We can rewrite the LP max { wTx : x2P } as • For every objective function w, this LP has an optimal solution at a BFS. (Since P is bounded) • So for every vector w, the LP has an integraloptimal solution x. • Since 0·xe·1, and x is integral, we actually have xe2 {0,1}. • So every optimal LP solution is actually an (optimal) IP solution.) So we can solve the IP by solving the LP and returning a BFS. • 0 otherwise (xe·1 is implicit)

  33. How to solve combinatorial IPs? • Two common approaches • Design combinatorial algorithm that directly solves IP • Often such algorithms have a nice LP interpretation • Relax IP to an LP; prove that they give same solution; solve LP by the ellipsoid method • Need to show special structure of the LP’s extreme points • Sometimes we can analyze the extreme points combinatorially • Sometimes we can use algebraic structure of the constraints.For example, if constraint matrix is Totally Unimodularthen IP and LP are equivalent

More Related